For a change, how about an actual and honest discussion of Noah's Ark-

Why don't you stop and read The Relgion of Babylon and Assyria byt Morris Jastrow..

Its supported by nearly 200 years of excavations and study of the ruins and antiquities as well as tens of thousands of clay tablets dating to 4,000 BC...

http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/20758

 

Every single scientific challenge to the global flood story, and there are (conservatively) hundreds, requires them to invent a new miracle to account for it. No one comes to believe in the flood through rational inquiry. They have the conclusion they want and they will invent as many new miracles as they need to in order to preserve it.

 

Back when I went to church(been many years) my pastor's theory on it is this. If you have a boat and you need to try and get as many animals on it as possible. Would you go with full adult animals that take up more space and eat more, therefore crapping more? Or would you get the young animals that are only a fraction of the size and only eat a fraction of the amount? they do't need to be reproducing until after they got off the ark.

 

Even generously allowing that survival of any species would be possible after such an event, any mated pair that didn't start multiplying the moment they exited the ark would have quickly gone extinct. One of the only two gazelles in existence? Sorry, but that means you are only one of a very short supply of carnivore food.

 

So historians "know" the Ark existed (your claim)...but those same historians don't know how many animals were onboard or how they were fed for months by 8 people?

 

Qchan has zero interest in education.. You won't get thru to him.

 

It's not about him....it's about showing OTHERS what HE is. Though he does that very well on his own as well, of course.

 

Weren't the animals on the ark for one year. Young animals grow and eat a lot in 12 months.

- - - Updated - - -

Wanting to play in the top grade but barely making third grade.

 

Well, show me where in the bible says that religion is about science.

You have not presented any scientific evidence. You have argued in base of conjectures.

No, your position is invalid. If you want to challenge the biblical narration you must present facts, and you have none.

And since when the biblical narration is a hypothesis?

The biblical narration is mostly historical. History is not based in hypothesis but in witness records.

You are way out of touch with reality when you assume different of what the biblical narration is about.

I will ask you one more time to show the scientific evidence of the process from a micro-organism into a macro-organism, and you seem to evade an answer. I asked you to show such a process without gaps when presenting samples, and of course you will prefer to watch TV, read a comic book, have drinks outside with friends, anything but showing the required evidence... because you know there is not any.

You pretend to be rich in scientific knowledge but the true is that you have not a single penny of scientific evidence in your pockets, only fake monopoly game bills full printed in conjecture paper.

You seem to live in a world of fantasy.

The flood was not caused by rain falling like today, just drops of water hitting the surface.

The bible narrates that water came out with force from the underground. This causes earthquakes, this rupture of land also causes tidal waves. Actually you can't think of mere rain falling drop by drop. Such thoughts of yours are silly.

The flood was a terrible event. The ocean tidal waves were tsunami after tsunami, strong waves of water covering land, it was a catastrophe.

It was so terrible, that caused the division of that sole continent Pangaea into different parts some human generations later.

When water washes a shore in a tsunami nothing is left. Recently an entire shore was washed by a tsunami and no people, no houses, nothing was left, it was a clean beach like it was never populated before.

Of course geologists won't find what they are looking for because they overpass what the bible narrates, and like you, they follow a dumb Hollywood movie as a reference of that event, and in base of those "calmed raining days for forty days forty nights", they think they will find on the rocks signs on heavy rain long ago. (what a bunch of clowns, lol)

You are showing without doubt that you suffer of reading comprehension problems when you read the bible.

 

So a man 200 million years ago (Homo Sapiens have only been on the Earth some 150,000 - 200,000 years) built a boat, filled it full of animals that didn't even exist at that time.

Interesting indeed!

 

Actually you would just store sperm and eggs which shouldn't have been too big a miracle for God. Of course then God would have to be in favor of animal artificial propagation.

 

Pangea separated as a difting process a couple hundred million years ago... but 60,000 years ago there was an ice age that dropped sea levels by 400 feet.. That how people got to Australia.. Once the ice age was over, they were trapped..

 

I understand that Margot but how can a man 200 million years ago build a boat on what was basically a desert wasteland and fill it with animals that didn't even exist at that time, as one poster summises?

- - - Updated - - -

I understand that Margot but how can a man 200 million years ago build a boat on what was basically a desert wasteland and fill it with animals that didn't even exist at that time, as one poster summises?

 

The Noah story is a fiction based on a Euphrates river flood that lasted 4 days ...... 2900 BC.

 

I wonder what is the method of measurement you use to state so firmly that humans existed on earth 200 million years ago.

Or you have witness records as the bible does, or you must have solid scientific evidence without controversies to challenge the biblical narration.

200 millions of years is a lot of years for humans to survive. We are witness of several species getting extinct just by changes in the environment, and this is in hundreds of years.

I think that your 200 million years is nothing but infantile imaginations of yours.

You must show how you have measure those millions of years, and demonstrate that your method of measurement has been properly verified.

 

Maybe you should learn how to read, Cameron. He clearly stated that homo sapiens have been around for 150-200K years. The only thing infantile is your ability to discern what somebody is saying.

 

But when Noah came off the Ark, only one cubit measurement existed—the one he had used to construct the Ark. Unfortunately, the exact length of this cubit is unknown. After the nations were divided, years later at the Tower of Babel, different cultures (people groups) adopted different cubits. So it requires some logical guesswork to reconstruct the most likely length of the original cubit.
https://answersingenesis.org/noahs-ark/how-long-was-the-original-cubit/

 

The question was a put on.. There is NO evidence for humans 200 million years ago, but there is evidence for humans 100,000 years ago.

 

The tower of Babel was built by Nimrod .... There's loads of evidence for that... Some 60,000 (so far) clay tablets about legal transactions, events, trade etc.. Abraham was from the Terah Clan. The cubit was pretty much the same or about the length between elbow and fingertips. There is a huge body of evidence dating back to 4,000 BC that you can study in a book by Morris Jastrow called The Religion of Babylon and Assyria (Mesopotamia)

 

I do not know if Noah is neither an architect nor a marine engineer,
for the accounts came from him and his family when it comes to that biblical story about the ark.

 

Seriously buddy you either have reading difficulties, have a terrible memory or you're delusional. You're the one who keeps making references to Pangaea over and over again.

Now who's being infantile?

Is the above your words or not? Now,, you show me what methods of measurement you use and how Pangaea has any relevance to the flood in the Bible.

 

Pangea took time to separate.. As tectonic plates moved it was a "drift"... but there was NO hot water from earth's interior involved.

For instance... within the past 5 years the Red Sea widened by 25 feet because of volcanic and earth quake activity on the seabed.

 

I'm aware of this Margot.

I'm just astounded how cameron keeps making references to Pangaea in relation to the flood in the Bible and then trying to turn this around on me. I honestly believe he has comprehension difficulties.

 

Well, perhaps he doesn't have much education in science ... or any interest.

 

I don't have all that much knowledge of science, enough to get by but I do have the ability to research, read and retain.